R: R: [OPE] new book

Ian and Bapuji,
thanks for your observations which allow me to clarify some aspects.
I don't want to go in general into the relationship Marx/Engels. As for the particular point of book II and III the fact is that Marx's eight manuscripts for volume II and the big 1864/65 manuscript for volume III (together with some other small manuscripts for vol. III) were very far to be accomplished; the philologists have demonstrated that Marx considered none of those ready for the print. The point is not to argue that Engels's editorial work is good or not good; it is simply his work and not Marx's. Now Marx's original manuscripts are available. The critical apparatus of the MEGA shows in detail how Engels worked on Marx's texts and to what big extent modified them, changed the order of determined topics, created chapters and so on. In our book this is very well shown by Roth and Hecker, two MEGA editors. Engels gave an interpretation (I don't say necessary a bad one, but an interpretation) of Marx's unfinished texts. Publishing those as 'finished' I think he did the first relevant error (from a philological point of view of course; he did like that because he had also political issues to deal with). (btw. a MEGA-editor explained to me that comparing Marx's manuscripts with Engels's comments on those ms made just after Marx's death and before Engels had read them, it emerges that Engels had no clear idea of their content and organization).
To conclude: I don't think the philological attitude should be necessary seen as an attack to Engels. We have now Engels's works and Marx's manuscripts; as a matter of fact they are significantly different. I think this can't be disregarded (on Engels's comments on his own editorial work see also Hecker in our volume).
Best
Roberto

-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: ope-bounces@lists.csuchico.edu per conto di Ian Wright
Inviato: mer 14/01/2009 18.01
A: Outline on Political Economy mailing list
Oggetto: Re: R: [OPE] new book
 
Dear Roberto

What reasons are there to think that this version is the more
"authentic" version of what Marx really meant?

Given the close collaboration of Marx and Engels, and their long and
enduring mutual discussions, why shouldn't we consider the versions
that Engels got ready for publication the best expression of Marx's
ideas?

Best wishes,
-Ian.
_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope

Alice Messenger ;-) chatti anche con gli amici di Windows Live Messenger e tutti i telefonini TIM!
Vai su http://maileservizi.alice.it/alice_messenger/index.html?pmk=footer

_______________________________________________
ope mailing list
ope@lists.csuchico.edu
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/ope